Vivas

MEMORANDUM **

Neiser Vivas appeals his guilty-plea conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g)(1), his sentence pursuant to that conviction, and a sentencing enhancement imposed under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (b). We affirm the conviction, but vacate the sentence. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we will not recount it here.

Vivas’s claim that 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g) is unconstitutional is precluded by Supreme Court precedent. Scarborough v. United States, 431 U.S. 563 , 97 S.Ct. 1963 , 52 L.Ed.2d 582 (1977); see also United States v. Cortes, 299 F.3d 1030 , 1037 n. 2 (9th Cir.2002) (“Until the Supreme Court tells us otherwise ..., we follow Scarborough unwaveringly.”).

*671 Vivas claims that the sentence imposed by the district court was unreasonable under United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 259-60 , 125 S.Ct. 738 , 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), because the court failed to explain why it chose the sentence it imposed. The relevant statute, 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (c), requires that “[t]he court at the time of sentencing, shall state in open court the reasons for its imposition of the…